In real world I have no clue to the difference. Read and writes are a bit faster.

Mulox

Addicted Member

posted: Nov. 25, 2011 @ 12:08p

Very helpful, thanks guys. Well when I first bought my X25 over a 18 months ago, I got it because it rocked the sequential read and write scores in the market (at that time). But to be honest, it is my host OS drive, and I never use it to copy large files to and from it (or for that matter, any files). I use my 2TB drive for ALL data. So if I read the Anandtech article correctly, I should only be concerned with the first test (random read/writes, similar to what happens in daily usage of an OS). That being said, there are a ton of better performing drives out now than the Intel 320. And since my new motherboard has 6gb/s interface, I may as well take advantage of that too.

Gamster

Loyal Member

posted: Nov. 25, 2011 @ 12:18p

Main reason I went with this one is because all of the issues with SandForce Controllers and the BSOD and other issues, The price with rebate was cheap enough to get me by until newer generations come out. I would have preferred to have gone with a SATA III SSD.

ChefJoe

Senior Member - 1K

posted: Nov. 25, 2011 @ 12:27p

I've avoided SandForce/OCZ stuff like the plague. My SATA III computer has a Crucial C300 and my SATA II-limited x201s laptop will sport the 160GB Intel 320. Hoping for the best. Green for the OP!

ferndave

Thrifty Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 11:13a

Sold out.

Fliptech

Senior Member - 1K

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 11:55a

There's a couple Intel 120GB SDD on sale for $120 or $130 AR. Not sure what the difference between the 2 are. Maybe someone here knows...

I believe the only difference is the accessories. The B5 version comes with an extra USB to SATA cable & enclosure while the K5 version doesn't. Maybe these two were targeted towards different markets (desktop vs laptop)?

And for those of you wondering why these Intel SSDs are so popular while Sandforce ones run circles around them, just take a look at the DOA rate of both. Intel built it's reliable reputation with it's x-25 and it seems it has continued its tradition with the 320/510 models.

MeIsCheap

Nerdy Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 12:57p

Retail vs reseller models. Just got done buying a 120gb for $100 AR (I had a 10% off from Newegg that saved me $20 more).

there is a 160 still available (and 80s), just not linked in the OP. I think it is $5 cheaper, but cant recall as I was factoring a 10% off coupon. The only difference between sizes is that the larger ones have faster write times, but all have 270 mb/s read speeds.

Mulox

Addicted Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 1:05p

Yes, I have heard the same about reliability, which is why I went with my X25. However, it seems the new Crucial drives with 6gb/s SATA3 are much faster on random read/write (which is all I care about), while still having a reliable controller. Am I missing something?

sisq0kidd

Broke Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 1:42p

Mulox said: Yes, I have heard the same about reliability, which is why I went with my X25. However, it seems the new Crucial drives with 6gb/s SATA3 are much faster on random read/write (which is all I care about), while still having a reliable controller. Am I missing something?

Oh no, don't get me wrong. The Crucial M4's have been stellar along with some other Sandforce-based SSDs. I was commenting more on the history of Intel vs Sandforce reliability.

MeIsCheap

Nerdy Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 2:08p

sisq0kidd said: Mulox said: Yes, I have heard the same about reliability, which is why I went with my X25. However, it seems the new Crucial drives with 6gb/s SATA3 are much faster on random read/write (which is all I care about), while still having a reliable controller. Am I missing something?

Oh no, don't get me wrong. The Crucial M4's have been stellar along with some other Sandforce-based SSDs. I was commenting more on the history of Intel vs Sandforce reliability.

sandforce is great, but seems to be plagued by firmware issues when it comes to SATA III drives, imo. They are for sure faster when they are on the right setup though.

Though there is no question when it comes to needing a 7mm drive, this is the (only ssd) way to go.

Mulox

Addicted Member

posted: Nov. 26, 2011 @ 2:30p

So if want to stay away from Sandforce... is Intel my only option? What is the most fastest & reliable SATA3 SSD out there now?

I purchased 2 Intel 320 Series SSDSA2CW160G3K5 2.5" 160GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drives during the rebate offer (11/25). I went to intel's website to complete the rebate form but it is only giving me the option to receive an American Express Rewards Card. I'm not interested in an AE card. Has anyone tried to complete the rebate had the same problem? I've tried to contact Intel but have been unable to reach a person. I talked to AE and they didn't have a clue what I was talking about. I'm not interested in an AE card because they have an annual fee. That would come right off of my rebate.

Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Members of our community may attach files to a post in accordance with the User Agreement. FatWallet is not responsible for the content, accuracy, completeness or validity of any information contained in any attached file. Files have *not* been scanned for viruses. Be especially wary of Excel files which may contain malicious content.

FatWallet coupons help you save more when shopping online. Use our Coupons Search to browse coupons and offers from thousands of stores, gathered into one convenient location.

Forums
As part of our FatWallet Community, you can share deals with almost a million shoppers in our forums. Forum content is generated by consumers for consumers. Share deals, money-saving tips, and more. It's FREE, fun, and addicting.

Support
Our customer experience team is here around the clock - real people ready to assist.